Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

[Bus Stopped]

I'm wondering why it is you don't think they will have much of an effect; whether that's based on looking at what's happened in other places where they have been introduced. In other words, whether you'd say it's an informed opinion or just a personal reckon.

I think it’s hard to have an informed position because of all the variations you and others have mentioned.

If car use throughout London keeps going up to pre covid levels then we can assume they aren’t having much affect overall.

More interesting would be figures for car ownership for people in LTNs and if they use their car less (I appreciate the stats for the second would be very hard to get). The LTNs in Lambeth are still lined with cars.

 

[alex_]

I think it’s hard to have an informed position because of all the variations you and others have mentioned.

If car use throughout London keeps going up to pre covid levels then we can assume they aren’t having much affect overall.

More interesting would be figures for car ownership for people in LTNs and if they use their car less (I appreciate the stats for the second would be very hard to get). The LTNs in Lambeth are still lined with cars.

Lambeth are putting up parking costs for residents, teachers, doctors and anyone who works in the borough.

Car insurance costs are also rising.

Against this, id be surprised if car ownership was rising.

Alex

 

[edcraw]

I think it’s hard to have an informed position because of all the variations you and others have mentioned.

If car use throughout London keeps going up to pre covid levels then we can assume they aren’t having much affect overall.

More interesting would be figures for car ownership for people in LTNs and if they use their car less (I appreciate the stats for the second would be very hard to get). The LTNs in Lambeth are still lined with cars.

This study showed a 6% decrease after 2 years.

The Impact of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and Other Active Travel Interventions on Vehicle Ownership: Findings from the Outer London Mini-Holland Programme | Published in Findings

By Anna Goodman, Scott Urban & 1 more. Car/van ownership fell in areas introducing ‘low traffic neighbourhoods’ (-6%, or 23 cars/vans per 1000 adults, after two years). Smaller reductions occurred in areas introducing cycle tracks.

findingspress.org

 

[thebackrow]

And this study showed a decrease in mileage driven

Low traffic neighbourhoods in London cut daily driving among residents by 1.3km | Imperial News | Imperial College London

CAR USE REDUCTION - Residents in Lambeth started driving less once their area became a low traffic neighbourhood relative to those living in surrounding areas.

www.imperial.ac.uk

 

[Bus Stopped]

This study showed a 6% decrease after 2 years.

The Impact of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods and Other Active Travel Interventions on Vehicle Ownership: Findings from the Outer London Mini-Holland Programme | Published in Findings

By Anna Goodman, Scott Urban & 1 more. Car/van ownership fell in areas introducing ‘low traffic neighbourhoods’ (-6%, or 23 cars/vans per 1000 adults, after two years). Smaller reductions occurred in areas introducing cycle tracks.

findingspress.org

Fair enough. 6% isn’t insignificant.

 

[edcraw]

Fair enough. 6% isn’t insignificant.

Yes - and it seems it’s more of you take into account the changes in demographics, lots of young fairly well off families have moved there recently.

 

[teuchter]

I think it’s hard to have an informed position because of all the variations you and others have mentioned.

But LTN-like measures have been introduced in many places around the world, inlcuding in many places pre covid, and the effects of them have been recorded and studied, over some time. So I don't think it's so difficult to have an informed opinion even if it's hard to predict exactly what the outcome will be in London.

 

[nagapie]

I mean that there are lots of people who are disabled and who don't have the option of using a car. And don't necessarily have the option of others driving for them, or prefer to live as independently as possible so only ask others to drive for them occasionally. Many of these people may have limited mobility, maybe they can walk a short distance only, maybe they use a mobility scooter. They might use public transport. They might be able to do shopping themselves as long as they can use a trolley and their route to the shop has dropped kerbs, or they walk quite slowly and can only cross roads where there is a signalled crossing. Of course, many elderly people fall into this kind of category.

And all of these people can potentially benefit massively from measures that reduce traffic and improve things for pedestrians.

Well, I expect you agree with and know all this and will say fine, of course, but how does any of this justify limiting which filters a blue badge holder can access because giving blue badge holders blanket access is really just a very small number, not large enough to significantly compromise the benefits that can be brought about by an LTN. My answer is I don't know - you may well be right but I also wonder whether this has been looked at and decided that in fact it would add significant numbers, especially if, as Lambeth has decided to do, you allow access for the badge holder plus someone else.

I think saying something like this before got me accused of ableism but I would say that if someone who has a disability but can drive, has a few minutes added to their journey, as a result of measures that can make life easier for people who have a disability but can't drive, then that's potentially ok or even a good thing.

When you say something like:



It makes it seem like making London more welcome for disabled people = making things as easy as possible for those who have a disability and drive but that's not the case, there are huge numbers of people who have a disability and can't drive. There are judgements that have to be made that try and balance the interests of people in many different situations.

But anyway, the point is, I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of a blanket exemption for all blue badge holders but I can see there might be valid arguments against it and those arguments may be made with the interests of other groups of disabled people in mind. This is why I wish Lambeth would be explicit in their reasoning, when they decide on the one filter policy.

I really don't see how meeting the needs of both of the groups of disabled people you reference is mutually exclusive. Both lots of adjustments could be made.

 

[nagapie]

I did want to respond to this, although there's been a lot of discussion since.

I support the scheme because it makes the streets safer for all residents - both able bodied and disabled. I also think that BB holders should be given access through the filters. However, I can't make this happen, but that doesn't mean I automatically agree with the policy that Lambeth have gone with.

Clearly for you, a car is extremely important and you need to use it. However, the majority of disabled Londoners do not have a driving licence (62% compared to 45 % non disabled) nor do they have access to a vehicle (58% compared to 38% non disabled). How do we make neighbourhoods better and safer for those who aren't driving? I would say by limiting non disabled car access - these drivers WILL often have a choice about how to travel and 'by car' should not be the default mode.

Yes. Agreed. I'm not talking about people who choose to drive and could easily access public transport. That's why I don't think it's fair to apply the same rules to wheelchair users etc.

 

[nagapie]

If the sat nav’s won’t route them though LTNs how would most drivers ( the majority of whom use satnavs ) find the LTN cut throughs ?

Other than the ones they know, which will mostly be local - they won’t.

Alex

But I do live locally and have to join often very heavy traffic when I'm not able to use public transport.
Are you saying that eventually the oldies like me will be dead and no one will even know they're being rerouted.
Well they will because they'll always be having to travel on heavily used main roads and there will be no options when things go wrong like accidents or road works. Unless the LTNs prove a huge success and everyone else gets off the roads, but that's definitely not happening yet.

 

[alex_]

But I do live locally and have to join often very heavy traffic when I'm not able to use public transport.
Are you saying that eventually the oldies like me will be dead and no one will even know they're being rerouted.
Well they will because they'll always be having to travel on heavily used main roads and there will be no options when things go wrong like accidents or road works. Unless the LTNs prove a huge success and everyone else gets off the roads, but that's definitely not happening yet.

No, I’m saying that the vast majority of people don’t know every back route across all of London, most people just know their local ones. So even if blue badge holders can drive through all LTNs, most won’t other than the ones in neighbourhoods they know.

And that no one can tell the difference between waze routing you a specific way because of heavy traffic or a burst water main or a whole series of LTNs.

 

[nagapie]

No, I’m saying that the vast majority of people don’t know every back route across all of London, most people just know their local ones. So even if blue badge holders can drive through all LTNs, most won’t other than the ones in neighbourhoods they know.

And that no one can tell the difference between waze routing you a specific way because of heavy traffic or a burst water main or a whole series of LTNs.

So more the reason to give to blue badge holders as will help them access their local communities without having a big impact.

I am aware that you are in agreement with giving access before you read my tone as offended, it's not.

 

[sparkybird]

Yes. Agreed. I'm not talking about people who choose to drive and could easily access public transport. That's why I don't think it's fair to apply the same rules to wheelchair users etc.

Absolutely, it's not fair to apply the same rules. The filters should be opened up to BB holders.

 

[sparkybird]

What was your initial point in quoting car ownership in Streatham Wells? I took it to mean those without a car would benefit, and therefore be in favour of the LTN. Apologies if you meant something else.

And I didn't say that Valley Road is a public transport desert. I said it is one of the worst served roads for public transport in the borough, which I still believe. The 315 is timetabled every 20 minutes and is a short wheelbase bus. To get to any of the train stations, you're maybe talking 20 minutes walk, often over steep arches to clear the rail line into Streatham.

Those who don't drive, who are generally the poorest in our borough, are being unfairly impacted by those who do. The LTNs in my view seek to redress some of this imbalance. That was my point.
Not owning a car doesn't automatically mean you support the LTN, nor are all car drivers against them, as it's clear from my conversations with people.

The 315 bus is well used but TfL won't increase frequency because they say there isn't sufficient demand. Maybe as more people swap a car journey for the bus then it might get to one every 15 mins? My bug bear with the bus is that there are very few seats for passengers to wait. This is now being addressed by the installation of temporary parklets with seating. These also serve to help those who need a rest when walking to the high street, train stations and other bus routes.

 

[thebackrow]

Absolutely, it's not fair to apply the same rules. The filters should be opened up to BB holders.

Blue Badge holders or, as Nagapie just said, Wheelchair users? If Lambeth had taken the Waltham Forest approach, then all these filters would have been physical bollards and we'd not be having the arguments. For sure, BBH can drive through bus gates - those have large heavy vehicles coming though at intervals anyway, so they're different. But every minor filtered road? From my ableist perspective I don't see it.

Here's 3 random trips from within Lambeth LTNs to random other points. All of them are quicker by car than by public transport (and nearly as quick by car as cycling). The big discouragement for 'everyday' drivers has to be parking - it needs to be difficult and expensive (which is why charging needs to be 24/7). But BBH can park for free directly outside their destination for free in most cases. Where's the big disadvantage that they're being placed at due to LTNs?

Also, I'm not sure the 'it's only a tiny number of vehicles' claims stack up and that it's super difficult to get a blue badge (and that's before any misuse) - 4.6% / 2.5m of the UK population now have a blue badge. Compare that to vehicles it's 8% and over 9% of households.

Misuse seems to run at about 5% of badges (Lambeth being one of the very few boroughs that does anything about it, which somewhat suggests it's more of an issue here than elsewhere. That said, the most blatant misuse I've seen was a local housing association employee who was delivering a load of timber to a flat being done up on my street.

"In 2022’s London-wide Day of Action, 141 officers inspected 18,341 vehicles. Of the 1,899 Blue Badges checked, nearly 95% were legally used by disabled drivers. But over 122 fines were issued and 24 vehicles removed for offences including 55 misused and 47 stolen badges."

And still we only seem to be considering disabled people using cars as if that is the only way local travel can be enabled.

 

[Smick]

If a person were disabled, has a blue badge and, off the top of my head, is doing something at Streatham leisure centre, I wouldn’t consider it abuse if an able-bodied family member were to use a blue badge exemption to drive by themselves in the registered car and collect the disabled person from the leisure centre. This is enabling the disabled person to live a fuller life.

There are probably many nuances that we haven’t considered. Each disability is as unique as each person is, and requires different handling.

 

[thebackrow]

If a person were disabled, has a blue badge and, off the top of my head, is doing something at Streatham leisure centre, I wouldn’t consider it abuse if an able-bodied family member were to use a blue badge exemption to drive by themselves in the registered car and collect the disabled person from the leisure centre. This is enabling the disabled person to live a fuller life.

There are probably many nuances that we haven’t considered. Each disability is as unique as each person is, and requires different handling.

 

[Smick]

View attachment 410201

To the best of my knowledge, blue badges have, until now, only been used for parking spaces.

So, if I take a disabled family member to an appointment, park in a disabled bay, bring them to the appointment, return to the car and drive away, that isn’t misuse, even though the disabled person isn’t with me when I get into the car.

But now we are talking about the blue badge being used as the criterion as to whether a vehicle can drive on or through certain stretches of road, that probably needs some more consideration.

I don’t believe there is much different in the two scenarios that I have described above, but one might be viewed differently to thr other in terms of legality.

 

[Smick]

Those who don't drive, who are generally the poorest in our borough, are being unfairly impacted by those who do. The LTNs in my view seek to redress some of this imbalance. That was my point.
Not owning a car doesn't automatically mean you support the LTN, nor are all car drivers against them, as it's clear from my conversations with people.

The 315 bus is well used but TfL won't increase frequency because they say there isn't sufficient demand. Maybe as more people swap a car journey for the bus then it might get to one every 15 mins? My bug bear with the bus is that there are very few seats for passengers to wait. This is now being addressed by the installation of temporary parklets with seating. These also serve to help those who need a rest when walking to the high street, train stations and other bus routes.

Are those parklets temporary? I thought they were here for the foreseeable future.

How long will they be here?

 

[Jesterburger]

There have been numerous improvements to cycling and public transport infra alongside LTNs since 2020. In Lambeth

• rosendale road
• Loughborough Road
• Norwood road
• Upgrades to a3 cycleway
• QW5
• 24/7 bus lanes in TfL roads and Kennington Road

Quite apart from much better conditions for cycling (and bus priority) on the roads with the LTNs. You can ride from the south of Streatham to the northern edge of Lambeth now though LTNs and cycleways.

By any measure much more in the last 4 years than the 10 before

The Brixton Hill bus lanes (and I'm sure others) have been extended as well

 

[thebackrow]

There have been numerous improvements to cycling and public transport infra alongside LTNs since 2020. In Lambeth

• rosendale road
• Loughborough Road
• Norwood road
• Upgrades to a3 cycleway
• QW5
• 24/7 bus lanes in TfL roads and Kennington Road

Quite apart from much better conditions for cycling (and bus priority) on the roads with the LTNs. You can ride from the south of Streatham to the northern edge of Lambeth now though LTNs and cycleways.

By any measure much more in the last 4 years than the 10 before

And across London:

 

[teuchter]

When I looked up the numbers the other day, it looked like the number of blue badge holders in London was something like 10% of the number of vehicles registered.

So, if you provide blanket access through all filters then you could argue that instead of 0% of the previous number of private cars passing through them, you'd have up to 10%.

And if like Lambeth you offer two vehicles potentially to be registered per blue badge then it would be up to 20%. In reality though ... probably it would be lower than that. And even if it were 20%, an 80% decrease is still quite substantial.

But - maybe there is a worry that providing such access would significantly increase the temptation/incentive for misuse. And maybe limiting it to one filter only reduces that incentive substantially.

This is only my speculation about Lambeth's thinking behind not offering BB access through all filters. Because they don't seem to have explained it, there can only be speculation.

 

[Smick]

When I looked up the numbers the other day, it looked like the number of blue badge holders in London was something like 10% of the number of vehicles registered.

So, if you provide blanket access through all filters then you could argue that instead of 0% of the previous number of private cars passing through them, you'd have up to 10%.

And if like Lambeth you offer two vehicles potentially to be registered per blue badge then it would be up to 20%. In reality though ... probably it would be lower than that. And even if it were 20%, an 80% decrease is still quite substantial.

But - maybe there is a worry that providing such access would significantly increase the temptation/incentive for misuse. And maybe limiting it to one filter only reduces that incentive substantially.

This is only my speculation about Lambeth's thinking behind not offering BB access through all filters. Because they don't seem to have explained it, there can only be speculation.

Misuse is a difficult word.

I’d rather the scheme would serve those that need it and have misuse alongside that. It’s much more preferable than a scheme which doesn’t meet its aims but is free from misuse.

 

[teuchter]

Misuse is a difficult word.

I’d rather the scheme would serve those that need it and have misuse alongside that. It’s much more preferable than a scheme which doesn’t meet its aims but is free from misuse.

The point is that if there were a significant amount of misuse, then it could prevent the overall LTN scheme serving its aims and those whose mobility can be improved as a result.

I don't know if it's plausible that would be the case; as above, it's only speculation about Lambeth's thinking.

 

[thebackrow]

But - maybe there is a worry that providing such access would significantly increase the temptation/incentive for misuse. And maybe limiting it to one filter only reduces that incentive substantially.

also the number of “confused” motorists who follow another vehicle through blindly.

but a section of road with no motor vehicles passing through is a very different place to one which has 20% of some previous volume. You’ve changed that filter area from being a pedestrian and cycle space to a quiet section of road. That has a lot of implications for design, road surface etc etc.

and there’s the “thin end of the wedge”. The demands for access in Dulwich started with emergency services and currently extends to “Blue Badge holders, SEND vehicles, emergency responders, GPs, nurses, midwives and carers” oh. And “deliveries of medicine”

 

[Smick]

also the number of “confused” motorists who follow another vehicle through blindly.

but a section of road with no motor vehicles passing through is a very different place to one which has 20% of some previous volume. You’ve changed that filter area from being a pedestrian and cycle space to a quiet section of road. That has a lot of implications for design, road surface etc etc.

Every address in the LTN is accessible by road, just a longer route. So it wouldn’t be repurposing an area designed as pedestrian and cycle space.

 

[thebackrow]

Every address in the LTN is accessible by road, just a longer route. So it wouldn’t be repurposing an area designed as pedestrian and cycle space.

Filters in Walthamstow that don't allow any motor vehicles through look like this (theres a thread with a whole load of videos and images of different filters)


If you're still allowing emergency service, and blue badges and whatever else you're much more restricted - everything ends up looking like a bus gate. The subjective safety and function of the area around the filter completely changes.


Given Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists I'm not at all convinced that this is the right decision. (Of course the anti's who did everything they could to make the scheme as weak as possible now now complain that the filters aren't very nice and people aren't spending time in them - they could have been much nicer place if you'd not insisted on a subset of traffic still running through)

 

[sparkybird]

Are those parklets temporary? I thought they were here for the foreseeable future.

How long will they be here?

As I understand it the council ones are here for the duration of the LTN trial, so 18 months. If the LTN is made permanent they will eventually be replaced with much nicer ones (see eg Atlantic Road) or the pic in the post above

 

[nagapie]

It is a very small minded and very Tory practice to withhold access and support for the vulnerable based on the idea of minority misuse - see our Byzantine benefits system supported by this ideology with it's cuts and sanctions. You don't punish the majority because of a few.
I am surprised to see people who espouse green values supporting this sort of nonsense. And also suggesting disabled people are against each other when there are no factions, anyone who is disabled or who cares for someone wants them to have the adjustments they need and knows everyone's needs can be met if there's a will. Which Lambeth does not have.
Lambeth don't want to fund a blue badge system, many disabled people don't vote. Lambeth do not understand disability, hence the carer being allowed access to one filter too - please look up the medical model of disability, totally out of date but still widely followed.

I also don't see how the numbers of blue badge holders, 10 percent across the whole of London and not all using the same filters as once, negates the scheme. Taking non disabled people in private cars off the roads would definitely bring the radical change people want to see. Except now we've got everyone on the road still.

The idea of golf carts for the majority of the disabled is a joke, in fact it sounds like satire. Where do you put the equipment, the carer, the family, the sensory autistic person who is self injurious while driving etc?

The reason all of this is ableist, and you can get your knickers in a knot about me calling you that, is it is all solutioned, or not, through an able bodied (term used more for understanding than liking) lens with not a single person commenting having direct daily lived experience of significant disability yet happy to refute the experience of those who live it. That is the very definition of ableism.

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

If a person were disabled, has a blue badge and, off the top of my head, is doing something at Streatham leisure centre, I wouldn’t consider it abuse if an able-bodied family member were to use a blue badge exemption to drive by themselves in the registered car and collect the disabled person from the leisure centre. This is enabling the disabled person to live a fuller life.

that is indeed a permitted use